Let me guess, you saw the `–` and thought "Clearly no human uses the em dash. It must all be AI".
I looked over the website and their github page and saw no indication of AI usage. I'm not saying it wasn't used, but unless you have actual evidence, then please point it out.
That’s an en-dash – and I use those myself. (I’ve experimented with em-dashes—brefly—but it doesn’t look good to my eye in English.)
It’s all by the vibes, I don’t have any concrete proof. FWIW, the comment seems at least hand-edited, so maybe it’s just this “the [A] is the [B]” trope that has triggered me. If the rest of it is readable, then I apologize, but still: that’s a bad title, please don’t use this – unless you’re writing a LinkedIn post.
---
Edit: here’s another LLMism example from another HN user: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49996255
I always get en and em confused. They are all just dashes to me :-).
The "Nothing else: no lists, tables, links, quotes, images or rules" is from the docs indicating that these things are not supported.
I, too, was confused for the longest time, but the secret is in the names.
En dash is the width of an “n”. Em dash is the width of an “M”, so a little wider.
Not unlike how in the trades, a tee is T-shaped, a wye is Y-shaped, a delta is Δ-shaped. Spelled-out letters aren't always geometric metaphors, but it's a thing.
Then you've got the first syllable of Ω (omega) being a homophone of Ohm, for what that's worth. From there we have ℧ (mho) for conductance... It's all quite clever. But I digress; I'll get back to emceeing and deejaying, cueing these elpees after a quick pee, okay?
Different fonts use different lengths (sometimes en dash is the width of an uppercase “N” instead of lowercase, sometimes it’s half of the em dash which itself is `1em` which may or may not equal the width of the “M”...) But it’s a good way to remember that indeed, yeah!
> I always get en and em confused
Yeah, it’s somewhat a typography-nerdy thing :–) (gosh that looks terrible probably; edit: actually it’s surprisingly fine)
> indicating that these things are not supported
Of course, but it does sound a bit unnatural IMO. Then again, I’m going by the vibes here.
> (I’ve experimented with em-dashes—brefly—but it doesn’t look good to my eye in English.)
I saw what you did there.
After enough time spent reading LLM speak, I’ve found its phrasing and particularities subconsciously work into the way I write as well, entirely by hand.
It’s not always AI. It could be a human ;) I really despise LLM-written writing too; but I think it’s nice to be not super paranoid about it.
Agreed. I've noticed the same too. I'm afraid we've probably already reached the time where text written by humans sounds llmish
For me (not the OP) I see the patterns 'The X is the Y', 'Every X is a Y' (both of which are there) and llm-sense tingles. Add in Not A, B, C or Z and I'm increasingly convinced it's LLM generated text.
OP didn't quote the part with the em dash, they quoted the part with the "The X is the Y", which is a common LLMism.
It's also a concise and accurate description of the service. All this gnashing of teeth over "could've been AI-generated" is overblown and tiresome.
> It's also a concise and accurate description of the service.
If it was a clever expression that does get the idea across, I would be okay with it. “The API is the UI” is of similar form and I love it. It’s simple, catchy, and it does convey a meaning: designing an API is just designing a UI for developers.
“The URL is the app” makes literally no sense without additional context? I’m not sure this is a “concise and accurate description of the service”. I did take a guess [1] and I was correct, but that was after I’ve seen the examples.
[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49997420
> “The URL is the app” makes literally no sense without additional context?
Yes exactly - it's one of those sentences that only makes sense to people who already know what it was intended to mean, because they know how it's intended to be parsed without having to puzzle over it. For the rest of us, it's pretty meaningless.
Regarding the LLMism, I didn't click on this submission when I saw it on HN last night, because I'm sick of seeing "The X is the Y", and an LLMish title tends to imply yet another piece of vibecoded slop.
My man, that web design is absolutely pure Claude. But hey that’s ok, the app is a good idea and works well, I have no issue with that. Clearly the person making it knows how to structure a web app and make it usable and it shows it’s not just slop. This is good use of AI coding
>I'm not saying it wasn't used, but unless you have actual evidence, then please point it out.
I posted a detailed reply to your comment with lots of examples and HN's new slop filter just killed it... due to overabundance of slop.
:-)
I recommend turning on showdead to read it.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50002280
I think you’ve been resurrected now :)
not that
This isn't human writing. This is blustering, bloviated Claudespeak we have seen a thousand times over. Try Opus 5 and its ilk sometime and maybe you'll see it too.
The initial commit:
https://github.com/SpeakingOfBrad/BIGWORDS.PAGE/commit/d5a11...
https://github.com/SpeakingOfBrad/BIGWORDS.PAGE/commit/d5a11...
https://github.com/SpeakingOfBrad/BIGWORDS.PAGE/commit/d5a11...
https://github.com/SpeakingOfBrad/BIGWORDS.PAGE/commit/d5a11...
https://github.com/SpeakingOfBrad/BIGWORDS.PAGE/commit/d5a11...
The highlights:
Don't get me started on the docstrings and code comments.